Poll + Bonus Dev Discussion - Multiboxing

145791025

Comments

  • papabear2009papabear2009 Member
    edited July 28
    It feels like if they allow multi-boxing it might turn people away from this game
    but
    if they don't allow it seems like more people would want to play this game.

    I don't really think this many people defending multi-boxing actually mutlibox but if that is the case well ...damn I better get my credit card out.

    Like if you multibox 1 or 2 extra accounts would you not play this game if they don't allow it?
  • Iv'e thought about it some and while my stance on Page 3 is the same, I think Intrepid could take all this feedback and build contingency plans. Start with the current stance but make sure they can go more secure.

    Some people have brought up that someone can make another account, buy a freehold, then give their main account permission to use it. Such a thing sounds ludicrous to me because I can't afford to pay for more than one account but perhaps Intrepid could keep an eye for things like 5 accounts from the same IP. If a group of Youtubers or roommates or something need more, then it can be investigated?

    I don't know. But overall, my point is that from this feedback they can make contingency plans for if their current stance doesn't work out or needs more restrictions.
  • RintaRinta Member
    While it's obviously next to impossible to prevent people from multiboxing - it would be great to have a system in place to prevent people from drastically exploiting it. I don't know if anyone actually does it in real world, but having say 50 boxes/accounts belong to a single person can affect some mechanics very negatively (for example limited participation sieges or arenas). There could be some semi-open clause in the rules where people are not allowed to multi-box "too much" and admins could review this on case-by-case basis, it would likely be a reported-by-players kind of offence anyway. Tricky stuff.

    However I am against making all multiboxing formally forbidden. We all know that some people will use it anyway and covering it up is not that hard ("it was my wife and kids"), so this would straight up provide advantage to people who don't care about following rules, and why would you want that...
  • katsuenyakatsuenya Member
    edited July 28
    People overreact about multiboxing because of previous mmo experience. And AoC is not like other mmorpg, any idle box may be punished/killed by people so it wont be exactly same experience.

    I would personally like to see no multiboxing, but I know that it is impossible to track down with 100% legit cases. So investing resources into thing which cannot be controlled feels silly.

    The only way I could see it working is if there is reward for reporting multibox/botter and getting reward if report was legit. In this case community itself will clean it up.
    iU0kW6L.png
  • BardticBardtic Member
    I think all this discussion is kind of pointless as there is no efficient way to prevent people from multiboxing on multiple machines. You can't isolate people who have multiple gamers in one household.

    The simple answer is make the game systems work in a manner that the time spent multiboxing is equally or less profitable than other ways you spend your time playing the game. Make it so that the freehold system isn't just like printing free money(WoW Garrison style).

    This makes it so those who enjoy playing the game in this multitasking, micro economic way, can do so. While others can enjoy farming efficiently on one character, or grouping up with other players to delve into more difficult content.

    Keep in mind with completely open PvP, it is going to be very difficult for a multiboxer using multiple input devices to defend all their characters.
    Bardicsic.png
  • PhalafaxPhalafax Member
    There are multiple different reasons to have more then 1 account per pc so trying to limit it is going to be hard. But if you have ever been jacked by multi boxer they are all standing right on each other and casting the exact same spell/move.

    Isn't there a away to track that? Via vicinity and cast log?

    Also I have members you are semi disabled but still want to play. So we set up 3rd party cast sequence macros to help them out.
    Example one of my officers is an electriction. Who was working on a sub power board when some one turn the power back on...... he's a bit crispy now and his left hand does not work to well so we help him out with casting macros to still be able to play with us.

    Just my thoughts
    Phalafax

    P.s who else has been messed up by 5 multiboxing shamans in wow. Instant lava burst ftw......
  • ShoklenShoklen Member
    I do not have a 100% answer, but I do have a feeling we can work Monster Tokens into a solution somehow... :)
  • ZaperoniZaperoni Member
    Zaperoni wrote: »
    First things first, I've only recently discovered ashes of creation and got hooked, I've watched a few videos and read some stuff. By no means I'm an expert and updated on all aspects of the game, so what I'm gonna say here could be wrong maybe?

    I think multi-boxing could influence some parts of the game negatively and in an unfair way and I will give you a few examples off the top of my head.

    -Housing, I've read somewhere that there will be a limit of one static house per account if one manages to buy it. By multi-boxing, one can secure multiple houses, causing the consequences that you can already imagine.

    -Mayor elections, I know that for scientific nodes there will be an election based on votes, so one person will have multiple votes depending on the number of accounts he has which is unfair I guess since, well it's just 1 person? And it could probably affect in some way the elections for military and economic nodes as well.

    -Covering a wide range of resource nodes, having multiple accounts logged in simultaneously will greatly increase one's ability to gather resources across various areas. A multi-boxer can gather a few nodes that are close by and then switch tabs to another character that is in a different area and tap nodes over there too, having un "unfair" advantage I would say. Or just get more resources from collective nodes using all his characters.

    -I've heard spying on other guilds is a thing and this could be done without multi-boxing if you have multiple people involved, but if a person multi-box it just becomes way easier to gather information and you don't "spend" one person entirely to this task.

    These are just a few examples of what multi-box can do to the game and I think the cons greatly outweigh the pros of having it allowed.

    So no, multi-boxing should not be allowed in my opinion. I don't know how could you prevent false positives (multiple people playing on the same network). But if in the end, you decide to allow multi-boxing, make servers that allow multi-boxing and servers that DON'T allow it, please I don't wanna get fucked over or have a handicap compared to them, because yes, multi-boxing is a paid advantage.
  • hapyhapy Member
    I don't mind current stance of Interpid allowing multiboxing.

    But if I can choose I would prefer strictly against multiboxing.

    Now main problem is how to enforce it. It is not that difficult to obfuscate connection to look like completely different player from server perspective even on same computer.
    Maybe it is great opportunity to use nowadays quite popular big data and machine learning. :smile:

    Gather information about connection like IP, hardware, resolution ... (basically concept of "web browser fingerprinting"). Having list of most used VPNs and their IP ranges. People will of course use VM etc. but with enough data there is potential to detect patterns of heavy multiboxers.
    Combine this with behavioral info of players. AI could be trained during alfas and betas and continually be improving after game goes live.
    Basically use big data to detect patterns of most players and flag deviations that would be investigated by active GM in game. By this AI would be actively trained and getting more robust.

    I am counting on the fact that if anyone is multiboxing it won't be as fluid as normal player. Of course false positives will be common, especially in the beginning of the system. That's why active GM is important.
    But after time there is potential for considerable success rate. And if so, after time, game could get reputation as not possible to multibox in it (or not).

    But I guess if auto attack is not a thing in this game, usage of macros and scripting will be strictly punished and overall design of the game will discourage use of multiboxing, it is quite possible it won't be that much of a problem at all.
    We'll see.
  • AmistAmist Member, Braver of Worlds
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    What solution will they provide if the poll disagreed?
    If there is a solution then there is absolutely no reason for multiboxing to exist!

    There's quite a difference between respectfully disagreeing with the devs and saying that they're mindcontrolling their community and calling those who disagree with you clowns.
    Brane_sig.png
  • hapyhapy Member
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    This poll had a different result, what is the meaning of this?
    4a8e3c0bfb271d8e0a02b0e8bd6c6fdc.png

    Ok ...Going to sleep ... good luck. and thanks for not banning me.

    not big enough sample size yet
  • AsriAsri Member
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    What solution will they provide if the poll disagreed?
    If there is a solution then there is absolutely no reason for multiboxing to exist!

    This is a poll and discussion to see how people feel, not a vote to determine what they do.
  • Undead CanuckUndead Canuck Member, Braver of Worlds
    edited July 28
    Please don't feed the troll under the bridge...
  • KernKern Member
    There's not really a valid reason to ban multiboxing if you have no real way of enforcing such policy. It's a nice idea and all, but not very wise to go in thinking you can come out of it without an immense amount of false positives. The fact is, that only a very small minority will be multiboxing and it won't affect 99% of the playerbase - is it worth to risk losing potentially thousands of people to false positives flagged by your system? I don't think so.
  • WBsteveWBsteve Member
    WMC51 wrote: »
    Hell, I say make second accounts cheaper so I can let my wife and kids play. 15 for first, 10 for second, 5 for each additional.

    yeah so gold sellers get a discount
  • KohlKohl Member
    It's also interesting to point out that the main reason people don't want multi-boxing to be allowed because it puts them at a disadvantage is ridiculous.

    This is what usually happens in mmorpgs.

    Player A multi-boxes. Player A has twice the resources you do. Player A has reached top gear quicker than you.

    Enter Player B. Player B, didn't multi-box. Player B has twice the resources you do. Player B has reached top gear quicker than you.

    And then there's you. Still struggling through level 30.
    You encounter Player B, and die, then start raging how they're cheating when the simple truth is they reached there by either being a better player, or spending more time than you did. Now you have no way to prove that they did in fact cheat, nor you can prove that they didn't cheat.

    If you want to compete against the best of the best, you need to dedicate serious amount of time to this game. If you can't do that, then I don't see a reason why this would be an issue AT ALL.
  • Fuppo HeadhunterFuppo Headhunter Moderator, Member
    edited July 28
    The current stance I believe is the correct one .... there would be to many false positives of people who play in the same home together. Using Robust detection software for Macro and Bot usage with the current advancements in AI detection will be ok as long as the harshest punishment is used in the accounts that are detected doing so.... Could utilize tools to transport any character doing to a cave with no exit and let them rot there for eternity.... Maybe a wall of shame along with a Perma ban .... Straight truth is that just saying people can not do will not stop people from doing, they will and detection and removal is really the best option.
    23in6tvjikn1.gif
  • LawlessLawless Member
    Multiboxing should not be allowed.
    It provides an advantage over normal players given by monetary means. It can strongly influence the economy and it can lead to major griefing of other players.

    The restrictions put in place are really good and will definitely stop many from multiboxing. Another measure I could think about is have player key-presses monitored and compared. When multiple characters simultaneously press the same buttons in an unusual manner, either have automatic suspensions or which would probably be more reliable, have a GM check them out and if needed warn/suspend them.

    I can't think of any other possible way to stop people from multiboxing but even if it's just the two restrictions you already have, it shouldn't be too big of a problem.
    ~ Unity Through Allegiance Masks.png?width=1204&height=677
  • OblivionOblivion Member
    edited July 28
    I think it's fine to own multiple accounts. I don't see how to prevent people from owning multiple accounts without false positives for people living in the same residence, etc. This does come with the cost, as many have pointed out, that people will literally be able to buy themselves elections.

    There should be zero multiboxing. Under no circumstances should it be acceptable for players to run multiple instances of the game and simultaneously control all of those characters from a single machine. In 15 years of playing MMOs, every time I've encountered multiboxers in games it has always been an absolute mess with various forms of griefing. They are generally regarded as an annoyance, only negatively impacting those they come across.

    Multiboxing from separate machines. I don't know of any method by which to effectively multibox from separate machines. Maybe I'm not aware of a known method of doing this that results in an efficacy similar to that of multiboxing from a single machine. If that is the case I don't support multiboxing from separate machines. The number of machines would be irrelevant and is essentially the same as a single machine.

    As far as I can tell, Intrepid's current stance is the correct one.
  • HaratsuHaratsu Member
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    Asri wrote: »
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    What solution will they provide if the poll disagreed?..
    This is a poll and discussion to see how people feel, not a vote to determine what they do.
    I hope that is the case..

    I hope they take everything with piles of salt. We lash out like abused dogs, interpid knows we care that much and try to trust them bit by bit. (warning loud!)
  • ShoelidShoelid Member
    Current Intrepid stance - Players are allowed to own multiple accounts, but may not launch multiple game clients from the same computer. Players may not use any software to automate character actions or mimic keystrokes.

    As others have said, this is the most you can do without hurting normal players. In an ideal world AoC would have no multiboxing, but that's not really possible.
  • Tsukasa wrote: »
    MULTIBOXING IS P2W !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Multi-Boxing provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations.

    It allows one player to bypass the 1 per account rule for freeholds through PAYING for another account($15/mo) AND computer(+$1500), then trade the required materials to the alt from your main account to build another freehold against the intended design. Preventing other players from taking the land! This can be repeated multiple times!

    Edit: The same exact system was implemented in Archeage Unchained and it failed. People DID use another computers and take great advantage of it. Regardless of how impactful the advantage will be in AoC, it is still considered Pay to Win/Convenience. There is absolutely no reason for it to exist!

    This was only one example.
    Check out my thread below for more:
    Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited

    There is literally no effective way to stop/prevent multiboxing in a way that does not give a lot of false positive results. Stop it.

    Transactions between characters can be monitor and sus activity can be cought. Apart from that there isn't really much they can do if someone has separate machines and multiple accounts.
  • Skb wrote: »
    I've never really been against multiboxing, but when I played Lineage 2 Classic recently, multiboxing was a huge issue, I am support player, and there was no real need for me, because multiboxing a buffer and playing something else was better in all scenarios

    This right here, is the main reason I am against multiboxing. I also tried out the L2 classic servers and this completely ruined the experience for me. There was nearly no reason to main one of the more niche classes because someone around always had an alt in the party.

    What I am worried about in Ashes with multiboxing, is mainly on the economy side. If someone has the resources to multibox, would they be able to level up multiple professions at once? can they gather twice as fast? How large of an economic impact could they make?

    I think the answer given to us by Intrepid is sufficient in that I doubt there will be many multiboxers if those rules are in place. I just wanted to provide my experience with the negative side of multiboxing.
  • MarcetMarcet Member
    If you can buy another account and play from a diferent PC, Its completely fine.
  • XheloriXhelori Member, Braver of Worlds
    WMC51 wrote: »
    .

    Hell, I say make second accounts cheaper so I can let my wife and kids play. 15 for first, 10 for second, 5 for each additional.

    This would be great! I like the idea of a Family Plan. I think a 20%-30% subscription discount for additional family accounts would be a nice perk. I suppose they would need to be linked somehow, though. Same credit card or bank account, perhaps.
Sign In or Register to comment.